One of Australia's most senior climate scientists is highly critical of Canadian research suggesting a re-think on the reason behind global warning. A paper from Canada's Waterloo University suggests banned aerosols, or Chloro-flourocarbons, are responsbile for global warming. The peer-reviewed article is published in the journal of Modern Physics B.

In essence, it argues CFCs are to blame for global warming since the 1970s and not carbon dioxide. CFC's, which were largely used in aerosols have been phased out since the Montreal protocol in 1987.

The Waterloo research is by Professor Qing-Bin Lu, a professor of physics and astronomy, biology and chemistry at Waterloo's Faculty of Science. He says "CFCs conspiring with cosmic rays caused both the ozone hole and global warming."

The findings suggest energy particles originating in space play the dominant role in breaking down ozone-depleting molecules and then ozone.

Professor David Kaoly is one of Australia's leading experts on climate change. He was a lead author on the fourth intergovernmental panel on climate change assessment report. He's a review editor on the fifth assessment report.

He believes this paper is wrong.

DAVID KAOLY: It is possible that this is a landmark study, or it is possible that this study is just completely wrong.

MARTIN CUDDIHY: What is your feeling?

DAVID KAOLY: My assessment of this is the study is completely wrong. A number of other studies have looked at the magnitude of the likely impact of chlorofluorocarbons on changing global temperatures.

This has been done in both the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) assessments and in a number of other studies and yes, chlorofluorocarbons are a small contributor to global warming through their role as a greenhouse gas. But, much, much smaller than the role of carbon dioxide.

MARTIN CUDDIHY: So you sound pretty dismissive of this research.

DAVID KAOLY: That's correct. This research would not have survived peer review by experts in the area. It has been published in a journal which appears to not normally publish articles on climate change science. But, because it has been peer reviewed, it does need to be considered.

MARTIN CUDDIHY: So the prediction put forward in this study, that global temperatures will fall for the next 50-70 years, can we put any stock in that?

DAVID KAOLY: That prediction is wrong and is based purely on the global warming influence of chlorofluorocarbons. The replacement chemicals for chlorofluorocarbons are hydrofluorocarbons, which are used as refrigerants, have already got as large a greenhouse influence as the reductions in the chlorofluorocarbons. And, in fact, the global warming influence of these chemicals, the hydrofluorocarbons, is already growing more rapidly than the reductions in chlorofluorocarbons.

TONY EASTLEY: Professor David Karoly from Melbourne University speaking to AM's Martin Cuddihy.